DOCSLIB.ORG

Letter-Attachment To-Sarah-Pearse-GCC-Planning

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Letter-Attachment To-Sarah-Pearse-GCC-Planning Leckhampton with Warden Hill Parish Council For the attention of Sarah Pearse MA BSc MRTPI Principal Planning Officer Strategic Infrastructure Planning - Development Management Gloucestershire County Council Shire Hall, Westgate Street, Gloucester. GL1 2TH 29th June 2020 Application by Head of Property Services, Gloucestershire County Council for Construction of a new 6 forms of entry secondary school building, with a new all-weather pitch, sports playing fields, a multi-use games area, onsite parking and other associated works at Land Between Farm Lane/Kidnappers Lane Cheltenham Gloucestershire (application no: 19/0058/CHR3MJ) Dear Sarah The High School Leckhampton Application: concerns and risks We understand that GCC plans shortly to approve the application. As you are aware the Parish Council is concerned about several issues in the application and we believe that GCC has not properly addressed the requirements of the NPPF in respect to valued landscape and may be at risk of legal action by local residents over this. In addition the recent announcement about changes to the catchment area undermines the basis for the previous traffic modelling and suggests that this should be recalculated as it significantly increases the risk of even worse traffic congestion than before. The Leckhampton Fields are designated as valued landscape by the Secretary of State and fall under NPPF paragraph 170 which states that: ‘Planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by: a) protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, sites of biodiversity or geological value and soils (in a manner commensurate with their statutory status or identified quality in the development plan).’ In the case of the Leckhampton Fields, the development plan is the Gloucester-Cheltenham- Tewkesbury Joint Core Strategy and the Cheltenham Local Plan which is awaiting adoption delayed by the Covid-19 lockdown. At the 14 May meeting, in answer to a question from Councillor Will Windsor-Clive, you confirmed that you were unaware of the significance of the valued landscape and that there was no mention of the valued landscape in the report by GCC’s landscape consultant or any consideration of the valued landscape in the application documents. Ms Arlene Deane - Clerk Leckhampton with Warden Hill Parish Council The Gate House,Cedar Court, Humphris Place. Cheltenham GL53 7FB T: 01242 465762 M: 07739719079 E: [email protected] Leckhampton with Warden Hill Parish Council The attached paper elaborates on what Cllr. Dr Adrian Mears and Cllr. Martin Horwood said to the GCC Planning Committee at the 14 May meeting and has recommendations on how we think the issues might be addressed. In particular we believe that GCC urgently needs to examine the issue of the valued landscape and produce a clear and deliverable plan to meet the NPPF requirement that it has so far ignored. We are copying this letter to all the members of the GCC Planning Committee, Simon Harper, Alex Chalk MP, Tracey Crews and John Rowley at CBC, Shurdington Parish Council and the four other Cheltenham Parish Councils. Yours sincerely Mrs Penny Henty Chairman Ms Arlene Deane - Clerk Leckhampton with Warden Hill Parish Council The Gate House,Cedar Court, Humphris Place. Cheltenham GL53 7FB T: 01242 465762 M: 07739719079 E: [email protected] Submission by Leckhampton with Warden Hill Parish Council June 2020 concerning Gloucester County Council application number 19-0058-CHR3MJ Introduction The site for this new school, which is named ‘The High School Leckhampton’, is located in Leckhampton with Warden Hill Parish and the Parish Council has made several submissions to consultations on the school proposals. The Parish Council has supported the school in principle but has serious concerns about what is actually being proposed, primarily over failure to protect the valued landscape of the Leckhampton Fields in accordance with NPPF para 170, the impact on the ecology and protected species, and the increase in the traffic congestion in the peak morning period. These issues were covered briefly in the speech to the GCC Planning Meeting by Cllr. Dr Adrian Mears on behalf of the Parish Council and on the ecology issues in the speech by Cllr. Martin Horwood, who is a member of Cheltenham Borough Council and also of the Parish Council. The purpose of this document is to elaborate on these points and jointly find solutions. Historical background The site of the school was previously identified as land for housing as part of the Leckhampton Strategic Allocation in the draft Gloucester-Cheltenham-Tewkesbury Joint Core Strategy (JCS). This proposed strategic allocation, which derived from the revoked 2006 South West Regional Spatial Strategy, was for around 1200 homes of which around 180 were on the GCC land that is the site for the school. Another 650 were on land east of Kidnappers Lane and a further 377 were on land west of Farm Lane that is in Tewkesbury Borough. The application for the 650 homes east of Kidnappers Lane was made by Bovis Homes and Miller Homes in 2013 and was refused by Cheltenham Borough Council in 2014 and subsequently refused on appeal by the Secretary of State in 2016. Importantly, this refusal was made on grounds of valued landscape and severe cumulative traffic congestion both of which are highly relevant to the application for the school. The application for the 377 homes west of Farm Lane was approved by Tewkesbury Borough Council in 2016 and was permitted by the High Court following a judicial review. That development is currently under construction. In 2015 the Parish Council and Councillor Iain Dobie as the county councillor for Leckhampton and Warden Hill wrote to GCC seeking more secondary school places in the area and recommending that GCC should reserve its land for a playing field for a future secondary school rather than using it for housing. In response GCC repeatedly insisted that there was absolutely no need for a new secondary school in south Cheltenham and gave an option for housing on its land to a developer. In 2016, the JCS Examiner, Inspector Elizabeth Ord, concluded that the Leckhampton Strategic Allocation was unsound on landscape grounds and recommended that development should be limited to the so-called Northern Fields, which are the part of the Leckhampton Fields bordering the A46 on its south-east side. During the JCS Examination Inspector Ord also at the request of all parties examined a proposal for a Local Green Space (LGS) that was put forward in 2013 by the Parish Council as part of its neighbourhood planning. In her findings she concluded that the proposed LGS was sound. The LGS included the GCC land that is now the site for the new school. Page 1 GCC had not raised any potential need for a new secondary school in South Cheltenham in its submissions to the Joint Core Strategy or to the draft Cheltenham Plan. But in 2017, following the rejection by Inspector Ord of any housing on its land, GCC proposed instead to use the site for playing fields for a secondary school for 900 pupil places with the school buildings themselves located in the housing allocation on the Northern Fields north of the GCC land. This proposal was inserted into the draft Cheltenham Plan in December 2017 just before its submission, with a proviso that the extra traffic caused by the school together with the traffic from the new homes proposed on the Northern Fields must not cause severe traffic congestion. The Parish Council agreed to this proposal provided that the playing fields were grass with no floodlighting and that any tennis courts were located on the north of the two GCC fields and concealed from view behind the existing boundary hedgerow between the two fields. In 2018, GCC changed its mind and decided it wanted to put the whole of the school including the school buildings on its own land. GCC stated that the reason for the change was that it did not have a strong enough case for compulsory purchase of the required land on the Northern Fields and it might also have to pay high compensation given the land was allocated for housing in the draft Cheltenham Plan. CBC and the Parish Council both opposed this change and in its evidence to the examination of the Cheltenham Plan in February 2019 by Inspector Wendy Burden CBC’s counsel said that CBC expected that Miller Homes, the developer, would make the necessary land for the school buildings available. At that time GCC and Miller Homes were collaborating and they put a joint proposal to Inspector Burden on the traffic mitigation. Despite CBC's recommendation, Inspector Burden found in favour of allowing the school buildings to go on the GCC land, although she retained the caveat over the impact on the traffic being acceptable. A factor in her decision was the shortfall in housing supply due to uncertainty over other planned developments in Cheltenham. This caused her to ask for the allocation on the Northern Fields to be increased. Removing the school buildings from the Northern Fields provided space for more homes. The collaboration between GCC and Miller Homes subsequently broke down and GCC has developed a standalone application for the school that is independent of what is being proposed by Miller Homes. This is suboptimal because it does not make use of the foot and cycle routes to the school proposed by Miller Homes through the Northern Fields. As a result GCC has been forced to promote an alternative footpath and cycle track via the public footpath across Lotts Meadow (subject to agreement by the landowner) and by building a cycle track and footpath along Kidnappers Lane. Currently Kidnappers Lane is a narrow rural lane with protected trees and old hedgerows and is an important component of the valued landscape.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Prestbury Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Plan
    DRAFT Prestbury Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Plan Cheltenham Borough Council Planning Policy Team Local Plan Draft Document May 2017 The Prestbury Conservation Area Appraisal is a draft document and will not come into force until the consultation stage is completed and they have been adopted by Chel- tenham Borough Council. Any suggested boundary change will not take place until that time. For any comments please contact [email protected] For more information on the existing Conservation Area Apprisails please click here. Swindon Village Prestbury Pitville Springbank Hester’s St Way Peter’s Whaddon Fiddler’s Green Oakley Fairview St Mark’s Lansdown Battledown The Reddings Bournside Hatherley The Park Charlton Park Charlton Kings Leckhampton Prestbury Conservation Area Conservation Areas (c) Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordanance Survey 10024384 Map 1. The location of Prestbury Conservation Area and other conservation areas in Cheltenham Prestbury Conservation Area Appraisal- Contents Contents 1.0 Introduction 01 6.0 Assessment of Condition 24 1.1 What is a Conservation Area? 01 6.1 General Condition 24 1.2 What is a Conservation Area Ap- 01 6.2 Key Threats 24 praisal and Management Plan? 6.3 Threats to Buildings 25 Implications of Conservation Area 1.3 01 6.4 Threats to Streetscape 25 Designation 1.4 Community Involvement 01 1.5 Dates of survey, adoption and pub- 01 lication 1.6 Proposed extensions 01 1.7 Statement of Special Character 02 Part 1: Appraisal 2.0 Context 05 2.1 Location and Setting
    [Show full text]
  • Sandford Parks Lido Conservation Plan
    SANDFORD PARKS LIDO CONSERVATION PLAN 1 SANDFORD PARKS LIDO CONSERVATION PLAN A Pools and Access/Activity Areas 45 Area A1 Main pool and poolside Contents Area A2 Walkways Area A3 Sun decks Summary 4 Area A4 Lawns Area A5 Children’s pool and poolside Introduction 5 B Buildings 47 1 Background Information 8 B1 South Range: Entrance and offices, changing rooms and toilets B2 North Range: Café and Terraces 2 Aims and Objectives of the Conservation Management Plan 8 B3 Filter House B4 Plant House 3 Stakeholders and Consultation 10 C Exterior Areas 50 4 Understanding Sandford Parks Lido 12 C1 Café garden 4.1. Origins and Development 12 C2 Service area 4.2 Historical Context 12 C3 East zone (Reach Fitness) 4.3 The Design Concept 16 C4 Car park 4.4 Engineering and Water Treatment 18 4.5 Site Development after 1945 20 D Planting 51 5 Setting, Access and Neighbours 25 9 Educational Policy 53 5.1 The Setting of the Lido 25 5.2 Access to and around the Lido 26 5.3 Neighbours and the Hospital 26 10 References 56 6 The Values of the Lido 27 6.1 Changing Attitudes 27 6.2 Defining Values 28 Appendices 61 6.3 The Values 28 Appendix 1 Shortlist of the most architecturally and 6.3.1 Historic Value 28 historically significant lidos 6.3.2 Aesthetic and Monumental Value 29 6.3.3 Community and Recreational Value 31 Appendix 2 Link Organisations 62 6.3.4 Educational Value 36 Appendix 3 Management Data 64 6.3.5 Functional and Economic Value 37 1 Visitor numbers 7 Management Issues 38 2 Opening Times 7.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Review of Secondary Education Planning for Cheltenham
    Strategic review of Secondary Education Planning for Cheltenham January 2017 1 Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 2 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Supporting data .................................................................................................................................. 3 Current number on roll ....................................................................................................................... 3 Pupil forecasts 2015/16 ...................................................................................................................... 4 Planned local housing developments ................................................................................................. 4 Strategic Housing ................................................................................................................................ 5 Recommendation, Land and Footnotes....………………………………………………………………………………………6 Executive Summary There has been pressure on local primary school places in Cheltenham since 2011. This is the result of a change in the birth rate locally and natural changing demographics, coupled with some local housing growth. This growth has been significant and resulted in the need to provide additional temporary and permanent school places at existing primary schools.
    [Show full text]
  • Secondary School and Academy Admissions
    Secondary School and Academy Admissions INFORMATION BOOKLET 2021/2022 For children born between 1st September 2009 and 31st August 2010 Page 1 Schools Information Admission number and previous applications This is the total number of pupils that the school can admit into Year 7. We have also included the total number of pupils in the school so you can gauge its size. You’ll see how oversubscribed a school is by how many parents had named a school as one of their five preferences on their application form and how many of these had placed it as their first preference. Catchment area Some comprehensive schools have a catchment area consisting of parishes, district or county boundaries. Some schools will give priority for admission to those children living within their catchment area. If you live in Gloucestershire and are over 3 miles from your child’s catchment school they may be entitled to school transport provided by the Local Authority. Oversubscription criteria If a school receives more preferences than places available, the admission authority will place all children in the order in which they could be considered for a place. This will strictly follow the priority order of their oversubscription criteria. Please follow the below link to find the statistics for how many pupils were allocated under the admissions criteria for each school - https://www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/education-and-learning/school-admissions-scheme-criteria- and-protocol/allocation-day-statistics-for-gloucestershire-schools/. We can’t guarantee your child will be offered one of their preferred schools, but they will have a stronger chance if they meet higher priorities in the criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Secondary Allocation Day 2021 V3.Xlsx
    Year 7 2021 intake allocation day statistics - Secondary allocation day 1st March 2021 Please note: *N/A - The distance factor is only applied when schools are oversubscribed, these schools were not oversubscribed and therefore distance was not a consideration of admission. **The distance provided is based on the allocation address as at allocation day. Where a school is not oversubscribed, the distance given may include details of places offered for pupils hoping to move. Large distances have been suppressed for data protection purposes, distances greater that 20 miles have been replaced with >20 to protect possible identification of individuals. Total Furthest Total Number of Published Number Last Total Number School allocated on distance Preferences Including School Name Admission allocated on Allocation Over Subscribed? of 1st DfE no. allocation allocated 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and Number distance only Criterion Preferences day (miles) 5th+ Preferences 4032 Archway School 215 214 100 N/A 280 109 5408 Balcarras School 194 194 8 1.47 Distance Over Subscribed 602 204 4012 Barnwood Park School 180 180 107 0.97 Distance Over Subscribed 678 238 5418 Cheltenham Bournside School & Sixth Form Centre 300 300 97 N/A 620 225 5414 Chipping Campden School 225 225 46 5.62 Distance Over Subscribed 353 219 5412 Chosen Hill School 228 228 138 9.50 Distance Over Subscribed 737 115 5420 Cirencester Deer Park School 209 209 96 10.67 Distance Over Subscribed 576 182 5419 Cirencester Kingshill School 196 196 64 N/A 303 166 4024 Cleeve School 310 310 94 N/A
    [Show full text]
  • Land at Leckhampton Leckhampton Gloucestershire Archaeological
    Land at Leckhampton Leckhampton Gloucestershire Archaeological Evaluation for RPS Planning and Development CA Project: 3581 CA Report: 11301 January 2012 Land at Leckhampton Leckhampton Gloucestershire Archaeological Evaluation CA Project: 3581 CA Report: 11301 prepared by Stuart Joyce date 31 January 2012 checked by Cliff Bateman, Project Manager date 31 January 2012 approved by Simon Cox, Head of Fieldwork signed date 31 January 2012 issue 01 This report is confidential to the client. Cotswold Archaeology accepts no responsibility or liability to any third party to whom this report, or any part of it, is made known. Any such party relies upon this report entirely at their own risk. No part of this report may be reproduced by any means without permission. © Cotswold Archaeology Building 11, Kemble Enterprise Park, Kemble, Cirencester, Gloucestershire, GL7 6BQ t. 01285 771022 f. 01285 771033 e. [email protected] © Cotswold Archaeology Land at Leckhampton, Gloucestershire: Archaeological Evaluation CONTENTS SUMMARY........................................................................................................................ 2 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 3 2. RESULTS (FIGS 2-7) .......................................................................................... 5 3. DISCUSSION....................................................................................................... 15 4. CA PROJECT TEAM ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Folktalk Issue 58
    Issue 58 FOLKtalk Autumn 2018 Friends of Leckhampton Hill & Charlton Kings Common Conserving and improving the Hill for you Inside this issue: FOLK AGM 2 The Word from Wayne 13 Walter Ballinger: Stalwart and soldier 3 Who painted the trig point? 16 Cheltenham remembers 4 Aerial photos 17 The flora and fauna on the Hill 5 Smoke Signals 17 Work party report 10 STALWARTS REMEMBERED AT THE WHEATSHEAF On Sunday September 30th, in bright sunshine with a hint of an autumn breeze, a plaque to commemorate the so called Leckhampton Stalwarts was unveiled by Neela Mann at The Wheatsheaf in Old Bath Road. A gathering of more than 50 people heard Neela, a local history expert and a FOLK member, pay tribute to Walter Ballinger and the other Stalwarts, who were imprisoned in 1906 as a result of their action to secure public access to the Hill. The Wheatsheaf was the headquarters for the Stalwarts and so it is fitting that the new plaque will be a permanent reminder of the sacrifice they made so that future generations could continue to enjoy the Hill. The Leckhampton Local History Society organised the event with their members being half of the gathering. FOLK was well represented. Martin Horwood, Leckhampton ward Borough Councillor and a supporter of FOLK was present. The current owner of the Dale Forty Piano company, Colin Crawford attended the unveiling. Colin is not related to Henry Dale, who bought the site in 1894 and was a protagonist in the drama, but he has an interest in the history. Walkers along the Cotswold Way from Hartley Lane will be able to see another plaque dedicated to a Stalwart and more information on the battle for access is available on the FOLK website www.leckhamptonhill.org.uk/site- description/history.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Review 2016-2017
    Annual Review 2016-2017 - Learning that works Contents 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 2.0 Our Provision: Learning that Works ................................................................................................................. 4 3.0 Investing to Meet the Needs of the County...................................................................................................... 6 4.0 Transforming Lives - Student Success ............................................................................................................ 9 5.0 Supporting Business........................................................................................................................................... 10 5.1 Superdry: Redefining apprenticeships ............................................................................................................. 12 6.0 Supporting our Community .................................................................................................................................... 14 7.0 Working in Partnership ........................................................................................................................................... 16 8.0 Staff Equipped to Support Success.................................................................................................................. 18 9.0 Governance.........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cheltenham Children's Needs Assessment 2018
    Cheltenham Children’s Needs Assessment 2018 Data & Analysis Team Gloucestershire County Council [email protected] 2 Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4 2. Overall picture............................................................................................................................. 4 3. Demographics and deprivation ................................................................................................... 4 Population ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Poverty and deprivation ................................................................................................................. 5 House prices and affordability ...................................................................................................... 10 Ethnicity ........................................................................................................................................ 13 4. Educational achievement .......................................................................................................... 22 End of EYFS .................................................................................................................................... 24 KS2 ................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Communications Roads Cheltenham Lies on Routes Connecting the Upper Severn Vale with the Cotswolds to the East and Midlands to the North
    DRAFT – VCH Gloucestershire 15 [Cheltenham] Communications Roads Cheltenham lies on routes connecting the upper Severn Vale with the Cotswolds to the east and Midlands to the north. Several major ancient routes passed nearby, including the Fosse Way, White Way and Salt Way, and the town was linked into this important network of roads by more local, minor routes. Cheltenham may have been joined to the Salt Way running from Droitwich to Lechlade1 by Saleweistrete,2 or by the old coach road to London, the Cheltenham end of which was known as Greenway Lane;3 the White Way running north from Cirencester passed through Sandford.4 The medieval settlement of Cheltenham was largely ranged along a single high street running south-east and north-west, with its church and manorial complex adjacent to the south, and burgage plots (some still traceable in modern boundaries) running back from both frontages.5 Documents produced in the course of administering the liberty of Cheltenham refer to the via regis, the king’s highway, which is likely to be a reference to this public road running through the liberty. 6 Other forms include ‘the royal way at Herstret’ and ‘the royal way in the way of Cheltenham’ (in via de Cheltenham). Infringements recorded upon the via regis included digging and ploughing, obstruction with timbers and dungheaps, the growth of trees and building of houses.7 The most important local roads were those running from Cheltenham to Gloucester, and Cheltenham to Winchcombe, where the liberty administrators were frequently engaged in defending their lords’ rights. Leland described the roads around Cheltenham, Gloucester and Tewkesbury as ‘subject to al sodeyne risings of Syverne, so that aftar reignes it is very foule to 1 W.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Portland Square and Albert Place District: Land, Houses and Early Occupants As Originally Published in the Cheltenham Local History Society Journal
    The Portland Square and Albert Place District: land, houses and early occupants As originally published in the Cheltenham Local History Society Journal. Reproduced with the kind permission of the Author MIKE GRINDLEY T'is gone with its thorns and its roses, With the dust of dead ages to mix! Time's charnel forever encloses The year Eighteen Hundred and Six THUS THE LOCAL PRESS i alluded to the 1806 Cheltenham Inclosure Award which allotted ownership of areas of potential building land on the north side of the town, including the piece of orchard that later became the Portland Square development. Numbered 223 under the Award, it bordered the Prestbury Road opposite the SE edge of the future Pittville Estate; to the south were the lands on which the streets of Fairview came to be built. Detail from Merrett’s 1834 map of Cheltenham, showing extent of Portland Square development by then. THE LAND AND ITS OWNERS: 1739 ­ 1824 The earliest mention of land so far seen in Portland Square deeds ii is in the November 1739 Will of Samuel Whithorne Esq., of the ancient Charlton Kings family. On 2 January 1801 his grandson, John Whithorne the younger, sold to William Wills of Cheltenham, gent., for £200 ‘all those three acres and a half of arable land [in four lots] lying dispersedly in and about a field in the parish of Cheltenham called Sandfield, otherwise Prestbury Field, otherwise Whaddon Field’. The tenant was John Peacey, a Charlton Kings plasterer. William Wills was a peruke maker of the then 48 High Street, who died in Spring 1804, leaving all his houses and lands to his widow Penelope, their son William to inherit on her death.
    [Show full text]
  • Pittville Park
    Pittville Park Green Flag Award and Green Heritage Site Management Plan 2016 – 2026 Reviewed January 2020 1 2 Contents 1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 5 2.0 General information about the park .......................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Legal Issues ................................................................................................................................................... 8 2.2 Strategic Significance of Pittville Park ........................................................................................................ 10 2.3 Surveys and Assessments undertaken ........................................................................................................ 13 2.4 Community Involvement ............................................................................................................................ 13 2.5 Current management structure .................................................................................................................. 15 3.0 Historical Development............................................................................................................................ 18 3.1 The heritage importance of the park .......................................................................................................... 18 3.2 History of the park - timeline .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]